I'll embrace the label

Out of (possibly misplaced) consideration I let my second ex-wife know of Cheyenne's death. They were once close.

The details of how our marriage ended aren't important- neither of us was innocent. The past is the past, and I hold no grudge against her. I can't say the same for her, considering the response I got several years ago to a friendly "hi".

The response I got back this time had me shaking my head, wondering just exactly what her reality looks like.

She wound up saying some nice things about Cheyenne, but not before beginning the message by saying: "I never had another thing to say to you after i walked away. You truley [sic] have a problem and need help."

The funny thing is, I remember what happened in our marriage, how it ended, and I know what her life has been like since it ended. Talk about people in glass houses and their poorly aimed projectiles... Anyway...

At Cheyenne's memorial, her mom- my first ex-wife- made a point of telling me several times, with a smile, that I am crazy- without specifics. But, it's clear to me she still likes me as a person.

Our son has a quite different take on the matter of who is crazy. At least, from what he's said to me. I guess it depends on perspective.

But, neither ex mentioned what my perceived problem might be, or in what way I am crazy.

Sure, I should take such pronouncements with a grain of salt, and consider other factors. Still, it does nag at me.

On the other hand, looking around at the world and society these days, perhaps being told I "have a problem" and am "crazy" might be endorsements. Going along with what is going on might be "normal", but it can't possibly be right. If being right indicates a problem, or a sign of craziness, I'll be happy to wear that label. How about you?

.

Bigots

When someone is utterly consumed with bigotry, it's nearly impossible to have a reasonable discussion with them. Especially where the object of their bigotry is concerned.

And almost no one is more bigoted than anti-liberty bigots- particularly anti-gun/anti-self defense bigots.

About all you can do is point out their bigotry for others to see, then move along.

They will lie and fling hate at you. It's their only weapon.

They are sad little people. Damaged people. And they don't know it.

.

Dragging others slows everyone

(My Clovis News Journal column for November 20, 2015... I was right in the middle of writing this one when I got the news about my daughter. As soon as I remembered what I had been doing, I just submitted it "as is" and never tried to finish it. I still don't know how heavily it was edited.)

Are there some things that can’t be accomplished without forcing people to go along?

Let’s say you are trying to hike back to civilization after your plane goes down in a remote area.

If your group is divided on the best way to survive, do those who want to walk out really want to be dragging along those who want to stay put?

Would that be good for either group; improve the odds of survival and allow you to get help faster? Or might this slow everyone down and take precious energy and resources from the chance for the survival of either group?

So why would anyone believe this is a good way to attempt a society?

Some fear doing everything by unanimous consent would mean nothing would get done. I think it means more would get done, and be done faster and better without the reluctant being dragged along.

Let's use national defense as an example. Let's imagine you aren't being taxed at all, nor are any of the products or services you use taxed in any way at any step. This means you could multiply your real wealth and spending power by many times. If you were just a few times richer, and could spend all that money any way you want, would you contribute to national defense? If not, then you don't value it enough to justify forcing others to share the cost. If so, then it is obvious it is valuable enough to be funded voluntarily.

The same goes for everything currently financed through the theft called "taxation". There are things currently funded by taxes I would gladly pay for- especially if I weren't being taxed so I could afford it. There are other things I don't want, but wouldn't stop you from funding. It's the difference between being civilized and being a society based on mutual violation. Plus, since it's cheaper and more efficient to accept donations than to pay swarms of agents to threaten people to pay up "or else", there's more money to go around.

If your idea has worth, you don't need to force participation. If you have to force participation, your idea is worthless.

Doing things collectively isn't necessarily bad. Only when it is not voluntary. I'm a fan of working together to accomplish things none of us can do alone. I'm not in favor of enslaving and robbing others to get what I want. Let everyone pay for what they want, not what they don't want, and pay for what they voluntarily choose to use.

-

GoFundMe?

.

Honesty may not be the best policy

Hold on to your butts...

“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” ~ H.L. Mencken

But, I'm not normal.

I don't spit, I hoisted the black flag long ago, and my version of slitting throats is watching the v*ters elect Trump. Or Sanders. Or Clinton, part 2. Or Paul, Cruz, Rubio, or any other of the toxic vermin running for president. They are all socialistic scum- the very flower of collectivism.

V*ters will get the president they deserve- unfortunately, they force the stupid bugger on the rest of us.

Is it bad that I hope the worst candidate "wins"? And the worse the president, the better I think it may actually be in the long run?

History shows that every president will be worse than the one before. Yes, even the ones from what you see as some Golden Age- because if they didn't void everything that was done before they took office, they added to the problem.

Now I no longer care how bad a president is- I just do what I must to survive his rule. I wouldn't exactly say I'm enthusiastic for an apocalypse, but I do sometimes think "Let's just get this over with." Sometimes you have to walk toward the fire- and then through it- to survive. You will suffer damage, but that's life. Do the best you can in less-than-perfect circumstances.

.

The solstice slump?

A little "thank you" to beat the Christmas rush...

Life is sometimes difficult to muddle through. These past five weeks, for example. I am having the hardest time keeping up my resolve to go on. Writing, I mean.

Am I having any impact?
Is it worth the financial hardships?
Is there something better I could be doing with my time and talents? Is this a waste of my time?

And, no, I don't have the answers to those questions.

I am hoping this slump is temporary, and I believe writing in spite of the feeling is cheap therapy.

This blog has frequently helped me sort through my own thoughts and feelings- even in better times. It's just never been quite so heavy on the feelings end of it. Usually I am putting principles down in writing to see how they stand up and to make them easier for me to express in my own life. Recently, it has also been a place where I write down the feelings I am having as a way to keep them from overwhelming me.

For the past twelve years this has been an emotionally hard time of the year for me, anyway. This year it is exponentially worse. But, without the blog and you, it would have been so much harder it is unthinkable.

So, yet again, thank you. And let me know if my writing is faltering.

.

Remember your place

To all my Democrat and Republican friends and family:

Are your lives really so empty and devoid of meaning that you feel you need a president? Someone to "run things" for you?

Personally, I think that's very sad.

I trust you to be able to run your own life, and after a little practice, being able to run it better than you think you can. I know you don't need a "representative" or Ruler or any of the "laws" they dream up.

So why waste time and worry choosing something you don't need? Your obsession over the crop of bullies, some of whom are completely idiotic, borders on the pathetic. I see trying to give yourself gangrene as about the same level of sanity as trying to choose a Ruler.

Those nasty vermin need you in order to carry out their plans; you don't need them to have a wonderful life.

You are more important than any of them. They aren't worthy to lick the soles of your shoes after you tour a chicken farm. Not one of them. Remember that and act like you really recognize it. They are all scum- and as long as you don't act like them, and don't fawn over them, you are not.

Remember your place- and remember theirs. They are parasites who can't survive without feeding on you- and as such aren't worthy to survive at all. You are so much above them you can't even see them from where you stand. Don't try to lower yourself to their level by giving them your v*te.

.

Thoughts on impaired driving

Drunk driving, drugged driving, sleepy driving, distracted driving, or some other form of impaired driving. We are all guilty of at least one of those. Don't bother trying to deny it, you know it's true.

I remember a time I was at work and suddenly started feeling a little "off". Before I knew it I knew I had come down with the flu. I left work, but hadn't gotten far before I was soaked in sweat, had chills, had a pounding headache, and could hardly make sense of what I was seeing.

I was every bit as impaired as someone who had been drinking. I should not have been driving- I did make it home.

That's not the time to "arrest" a person- it is the time to help them. Just how to help will depend on the situation.

Is there a solution to impaired driving? Yeah, self-driving cars would fix that- but I am not willing to accept the technology if it gives State parasites and predators the ability to more easily take control of my car. I'm sure there are other solutions, too, even if I haven't thought of them.

I will never accept any "solution" which violates individual sovereignty or allows meddling by State employees. No matter how "necessary" it might be claimed to be. That includes "check points", cops prowling around looking for whom they might devour, or anything else anti-liberty bigots advocate.

-

GoFundMe?



.

ZAP your kids

One of the best things you could give your kids for Christmas this year- if they don't already have it- is an understanding of the Zero Aggression Principle.

So, ZAP your kids.

How can you make the concept simple enough for kids (or the average statist) to understand?

Perhaps like this: "You shouldn't push or hit anyone who didn't start it. You shouldn't say you are going to hit them to make them do what you want. You shouldn't have someone else hit them for you. And you should keep your hands off their stuff."

I know that explanation misses some subtleties- saying they "shouldn't" instead of that they have no right to, for example- but as they get older you can adjust it to their level of understanding.

I know a few kids this gift of understanding would benefit a lot. And it would benefit those subjected to their presence just as much.

Oh, and if you think a little book might help them out, maybe Indy-Pindy is what you are looking for.

.

I can keep my mouth shut- sort of

(Previously posted to Patreon)

Sometimes I actually do keep my opinion to myself- as difficult to believe as that might be.

My first ex-wife*, Cheyenne's mom, really wants the guy who killed her to be "put away" for a very long time.

I don't.

I can't see how it benefits me or others in any way to put him in a cage and force others to pay for the facility, his upkeep, and for tax junkie guards to keep him caged. It simply multiplies the violations exponentially.

If a person is so dangerous they need to be caged, I think it would be better for them to be dead. But not by government "execution" (murder by state employee), and not as revenge, but by their next intended victim or someone coming to that person's defense. I have no problem at all with Darwinian selection weeding out aggressors.

But, I'm staying out of it for the most part. And certainly not encouraging her vengeance. This is one of those times I believe it is best to keep my mouth shut (she knew, but has probably forgotten my stance), even though it hurts.

-

*I have nothing against any of my exes- not even the one who seems to hate me- but am very fond of them.

.

Even a stopped clock... or a functioning one for that matter

I will- and have- agreed with people I really don't like, when they are right.

And I have disagreed with those I like when they are wrong.

It makes me feel a bit bad, sometimes.

But right is right and wrong is wrong.

I do tend to drop the issue when possible when I find myself disagreeing with friends, if they don't convince me right away that they are right. Because I have noticed that if I don't change and agree with them after the first couple of exchanges, it's not going to happen. And I assume they would be the same way.

.

Too many offended by free speech

(My Clovis News Journal column for November 13, 2015)

Once upon a time, people would hear someone say offensive things and life would go on.

Now, every word that offends someone gets brought before some authority. All too often, authority coddles the overly sensitive and punishes the speaker.

Freedom of speech has never been less popular.

Universities protecting their students from hearing- or seeing- things which upset them aren't helping the students. In fact, they aren't helping anyone, other than lawyers and psychiatrists. The bubble-wrapped students will not be prepared for the real world, unless the world is only for people unable to think or handle reality. If that's the case, beam me up now.

If you are skeptical about anything the control freaks want to promote, many of them want you silenced. Maybe that's not as ominous as it sounds, but I wouldn't count on it.

Skepticism over "Anthropogenic Global Climate Change" ("Global Warming") being real-- caused by humans, causing more harm than good, unstoppable without going back to a pre-industrial society for everyone but the elites, and only fixable by laws-- will be shouted down. As will questioning whether it's okay for physically male students who "identify" as female to be showering with girls in the school shower.

If you speak truth to people who have carefully constructed a magical realm of fantasy and wishfulness in which to exist, you are a big meanie!

Saying anything these delicate flower people feel "triggers" their fears, or which they consider "micro-aggression" (the imaginative term showing they don't understand what aggression is), they will pull out all the stops to get you punished, perhaps fired, for daring to stray from the path they have dictated.

And yet, freedom of speech has also never been so popular.

If you are saying the "correct" things about the right people- things aimed at people with politically unpopular opinions whom you are trying to shame into silence- you'll have plenty supporters on campus and among the "social justice" flock. To them, nothing is too offensive to be said about their opponents and their beliefs.

The First Amendment only binds the hands of those who would make up "laws"; no one else. A person who isn't acting as government can ban any speech he doesn't want being spoken or written- on his own property.

Listen to others, or don't. If freedom of speech doesn't cover things which make you red in the face, there's no point to it. Who bothers to forbid popular speech?

-

GoFundMe?

.

Medical stuff

This morning I am going in for a "procedure". I hate medical stuff (even knowing it is sometimes necessary).

Oh, and if interested in helping with this stuff: GoFundMe

.

I've been "triggered"

For the first time in my life I am experiencing being "triggered". You know, the experience where mere words or ideas can make you upset.

My daughter's recent death is the cause.

When someone says "I was dying!" or references death in some other trivial way I want to scream. Or lash out.

But, I know the problem is inside myself. If I coddle this problem it will grow worse.

I would never dream of begging for "trigger warnings" or other such enabling nonsense because I want to get over it. At least as much as humanly possible. My reactions make me feel stupid, and I don't like feeling stupid.

It's disturbing to me how many people are perfectly comfortable wallowing in their "triggering", to the point of going public and asking everyone else to change to protect their delicate feelings.

.

Evaluate every rule

That admonition would probably upset a lot of people. But you still ought to do it.

Some rules are OK. They don't violate any aspect of Rightful Liberty.

But a lot of rules are really bad and harmful. Your default setting shouldn't ever be "obedience".

When confronted by any rule, evaluate it and decide whether the rule is legitimate, whether it respects or violates Rightful Liberty, whether the person imposing the rule actually has the right (not the "authority") to do so, and whether the benefits of obeying the rule outweigh the costs.

What you find may surprise you. Or not.

.

"You would feel differently if you lost a loved one to a drunk driver..."

I've been overwhelmed with "feelings" since my daughter's death.

Sadness is one of those. But, unlike some people, anger hasn't been.

The closest I get to anger is something I would characterize as grim determination. I hope it doesn't come across as anger.

The State didn't kill my daughter- I've never claimed it did- but it damaged her liberty "for her own good" and still didn't protect her. But, what if it had protected her? Is it OK to trade quality of life for quantity? Not to me.

MADD wants stricter laws and nastier enforcement- and they've been getting their "legal" way for decades. It didn't work. It will never work as long as there is the tiniest vestige of liberty and property rights and privacy left. They will lie about that, and say they aren't anti-liberty.

What would it have taken for "laws" and enforcement to have saved Cheyenne? The War on Politically Incorrect Drugs would have to be much more draconian. Every person would need to be tracked and drug tested constantly. Cars would need to be rigged to not start if the driver was impaired in any way. Want to drive to work during allergy season? Tough luck. You'd need orders of magnitude more cops, watching every driver all the time. You'd need something beyond seat belts and air bags- not invented and installed voluntarily, but imposed by "law". Think how much higher taxes would need to be if government did these things, as opposed to the market providing some of the actual protection rather than the State stealing ever more control. I can't support that!

All my life as a pro-liberty writer, people have lectured me that I would feel differently if I had ever had a loved one killed by a drunk/drugged driver. Well, they are partly right. I feel sadder about life, but I still don't want to trade liberty for a false "safety". Nor do I support those who live to strip away liberty in the name of the "common good". They are still anti-liberty vermin.

.

Reality check

I have some bad news for some of you. You will not want to hear it.

Some of you believe "borders", police, a government military, and other governmental things of that sort are necessary to create and maintain liberty- or, as you probably misstate it: "freedom".

If that's the case, then liberty is an impossibility. You can't get something by embracing its opposite.

In such an event it would be time to stop even pretending to be advocating liberty; it would be time to just decide which kind of tyranny is more to your liking, and v*te appropriately.

.

All politicians are EVIL

All politicians are evil. It's just how they are- just like dogs are mammals, rocks are mineral, and gold conducts electricity. It is a defining characteristic.

They are evil no matter how nice they seem. No matter if they are saying what you want to hear. No matter if they sound reasonable.

They still seek authority and power and control. They seek to enslave you on behalf of someone else, enslave others on your behalf, live by theft, make up counterfeit rules and hire goons to enforce them.

You can worship selected politicians if you want to, but they are still evil. By definition.

As for me, I'll continue to see them as they are. None are worth your respect. None are worth any attention beyond what you'd give a rabid stray under your porch. Debating the relative worth of any one of them is a really silly, pointless waste of time. One I have been guilty of in the past- and a trap I may fall into in the future.

But, for now, I proclaim the truth: no one can represent me but myself, and no one has any "authority" over anyone but himself.

.

Good can't win?

How did this happen?

People have been fooled into believing only negative traits help survival. Liars, aggressors, thieves, etc. can survive, but people of principle? People who refuse to sink to the level of the bad guys? They are doooomed!

I think this delusion is caused by TV, books, and movies, where people in fictional situations can only be saved by fictional solutions.

If you act like the bad guys, what makes you believe you haven't become one of them? A difference which makes no difference isn't a difference.

The necessity of embracing the evil qualities to overcome adversity is no more realistic than the necessity to have a magic wand. But, I guess since evil is real and magic isn't, more people have fallen for that particular lie. It sounds "reasonable". Right?

.

Nature of government no shocker

(My Clovis News Journal column for November 6, 2015)

I’m not a political libertarian. I don’t believe it’s possible to change government in any helpful way with political action, including voting. Political libertarians believe they can change government by becoming government. If this works, let’s all rush to join the Islamic State and the KKK so we can change them from the inside, too.

Swim in a cesspool and see if you change it more than it changes you. I don’t believe you can clean a cesspool by adding a bucket of fresh water, either. Especially if you have to pollute that water to make it “fit in better” before you add it.

Government is corruption, theft, and aggression. Whether it is a city council, state legislators, or a national government. Being shocked when a government acts true to its nature seems as odd as being shocked when red ants sting.

Constitutions can't prevent governments from being true to their nature any more than posting a note beside an anthill can change the nature of the ants. The ants might notice the shadow it casts, and may change course to avoid the note. But they will still be red ants, behaving like red ants. They will still sting.

Maybe the situation would have been different had the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, come with a penalty clause to discourage violations, with swift, sure punishment for government employees. If you allow government employees to interpret the Constitution and hand out the punishment for breaking it, you are handing the fox keys to the hen house. You're back to where you didn't want to be. Any punishment would have to be immediate; beyond the control or reach of any government employee. Government calls this "insurrection" or "revolution".

This isn't to say government never changes. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are always small shifts toward something less horrible in limited areas, while the general direction is toward more control and snooping. It's the nature of government, and can't be altered.

Is it "defeatism" to accept reality? No. It is a call to change how you view government, and how you respond when its nature is exposed. Don't be shocked or saddened. It's expected. Remember this when anyone suggests raising "taxes" (money government is permitted to steal), or says "there oughta be a law". How do you really believe that will work out? It's not defeatist to live with reality; it's self-defeating to ignore it.

-

GoFundMe?


.